Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Nov 1, 2005 2:25am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Someone else 'Remastering' as show and uploading it to the LMA as a new seed ... out of line? .. acceptable practice?

That's what I was thinking too. I was more thinking in the scope of precedent .. if this is 'allowable' or cool .. what is to stop 50 people from downloading a seed, each 'mastering' it, some higher treble tweaks, others .. deeper bass ... all that .. each being a little diffrent file set, and each uploading as a new seed. That is a LOT of wasted space. the Archive.org servers shouldn't be bogged down with multiple 'masterings' of seeds. They should only have unique diffrent sources as multiple versions of a particular show. .. space is not unlimited. Maybe these 'remasterings' should be relegated to torrents and trades (all with proper lineage of course)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Nov 1, 2005 10:11am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

I was more thinking in the scope of precedent .. if this is 'allowable' or cool

What was established the last time this came up is the following order of respect for wishes.

1. Artist.
2. Taper.
3. Remaster.

If the artist wants something allowed/removed - we respect that first. If the taper wants something allowed/removed, we respect that second (removal depends on the situation). All else from there.

If there is interest in having 50 different recordings of a single performance - each with its own variation - archive.org will host it if there is space (and there is right now).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: A Dude Date: Nov 3, 2005 8:05am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

I think that the thinking by tape traders on ownership has been flawed for many years.

The music belongs to the artists only (and those who they designate).

Amongst the trading community - even in the vast majority of cases where there is no explicit artist approval - there is an excessive amount of reverence for tapers, remasterers, uploaders, etc. The height of the resulting idiocy are recordings which are available "only if you don't make copies for other people".

In the case of Archive and music where the artists explicitly allow trading of music, the music still belongs to the artist, NOT the taper.

Once someone posts something that is not their property, in a public place, they lose all rights to it.

Thus, there is no rational thought behind the idea of tapers having any rights whatsoever over recordings that they have released to the public.

Here is a good example. Suppose Anne Rice writes a short story and allows free public download and copying of it, and to facilitate this, she sends me the text file, and I put it up on the web in Arial Font, since I like that font.'

Do I have any right to prevent someone else from putting a version up on the web in Garamond Font? Of course not! Anne Rice might have the right to say "I'd only like Lucida font used and no other". But, I would have no such right to make such a descision.

Similarly, tapers are not creating the music. They are doing work in the process, which is great, but that does not give them any say.

PLEASE do not give tapers any say.

And that's a lot for me to say - I'm a professional studio recording engineer !


This post was modified by A Dude on 2005-11-03 16:05:37

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Nov 3, 2005 9:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

Hi AD, much older, much longer discussion threads here on related topics have made it clear that the consensus of according some respect to tapers and uploaders *as well* as to artists is something that is good for the overall health of this project.

Example of healthy discussion:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=28774

(BTW Note to readers: Posts in the vein of AD's have sparked strong reactions in the past, a few of which required moderation. I would not like to have to moderate any followup posts. Thanks for forebearance on this topic. I recommend just moving on since we had the discussion already.)

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-11-03 17:10:34

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffBrad Leblanc Date: Nov 7, 2005 2:16am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

Agreed, the issue at hand is more respect than "rights". If taper A does not wish to allow remastered copies of their recordings next to their original here, we will respect that. AD's point may hold true in a court of law, but that's not how we want to run things around here - I like the "health of the community" comment, Diana. Right on the mark.

How does it sound Tyler?

This post was modified by Brad Leblanc on 2005-11-07 10:16:19

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: A Dude Date: Nov 30, 2005 2:11am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

The biggest taper-friendly-band live music BitTorrent site has this policy in their FAQ:
===
I uploaded a torrent, but now someone is telling me that s/he taped it, or mastered it, or remastered it, (or authored it if it's a DVD), and doesn't want it torrented, and is ordering me to take it down. Is my torrent going to be banned now?

Only if you want it to be. The rights in unreleased live material belong to the performer. Recording it or processing a recording of it does not trick the performer out of those rights nor grant them to anybody else. Tapers, masterers, remasterers, and DVD authors acquire no control or authority over the results of their processing, and you don't have to obey. As the uploader you have some authority over your own torrent, so if you decide to comply with that person's demand and you ask us to ban it, we'll do it for you; but somebody else who doesn't care what that person says might upload a new torrent of it.
===

This post was modified by A Dude on 2005-11-30 10:11:37

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDiana Hamilton Date: Nov 30, 2005 3:19am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

You are quoting the policy of dimeadozen.org. It operates under rather different standards than say, bt.etree.org. I wouldn't call DIME a 100% trade-friendly site.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: A Dude Date: Nov 30, 2005 3:55am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

At that site, all artists are banned that request that electronic trading cease (such as Allman Brothers).

And, all recordings that have ever been officially released are also banned.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Willie E Lee Date: May 7, 2014 10:33pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

For most quick video format conversions I turn to "convert avi to mp4" (http://www.freeavitomp4.com/). It handles most of the stuff I want to do when I don't want to get into the details of demuxing and encoding.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffTyler Date: Nov 3, 2005 8:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

If there is interest in having 50 different recordings of a single performance - each with its own variation - archive.org will host it if there is space (and there is right now).

I guess that says it from my concern. I'll unfreeze it and let it roll public. I wouldn't mind hearing this 'remastered' version and compare it to the original. I didn't think the original was anything special to begin with, so I was suprised that you chose this one to work with. THanks for putting your expertise to good work, and in the future, just make sure you are on the level with the taper and respect their wishes if they do not want something like this done.

Tyler

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: BostonIndica Date: Nov 3, 2005 8:57am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: acceptable practice?

Hello Tyler.

I understand where you are coming from, there is nothing wrong with your point of view or your concerns. I'm sorry I didn't email you earlier. Thanks for all your hard work - taping and uploading shows here at the archive. We all appreciate it.

Peace everyone.

-Ben